Posted - 01/09/2013 : 09:44:49 In a surprising move theToronto Maple Leafs have fired Brian Burke. What do you think was the biggest reason for his failure in Toronto as he had built winners in Vancouver and Anaheim.

22 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First)

foolpittier

Posted - 01/19/2013 : 12:56:47 Hazel Mae

Beans15

Posted - 01/11/2013 : 12:30:32 Well, we will have to agree to disagree. I think Burke did make some very good moves and did add some key pieces to the puzzle. I also think he did some very dumb moves and took away from the talent the team could have and should have had.

I think the needs of the Leafs today is different than when Burke started. But, my point is I don't believe the have fewer holes today than in 2008. Just that the holes are different.

Daniel Alfredsson is the MVP of the universe. All hail the Ottawa Senators!!!!!

slozo

Posted - 01/11/2013 : 05:12:17 I think your first post was excellent Beans, and well stated all around. If you are correct, it goes a long way to explain why Toronto ownership would so severely handcuff Nonis in this way at the last minute . . . although I still contend that the decision and opinion on Burke should not in ANY way have been different in September than when the Leafs ended the season. After that, they could have fired Burke and kept him in his 'advisory role' for the draft, and we'd have probably drafted the exact same players and Nonis would have had a much, much better chance at success. So, the "ownership group is crazy" tag stays, for me.

I have to disagree a bit with your second point, however.

The Leafs - however you want to rank their prospects - are in a way better state than when Burke took over. Obviously, the goalie position is a sore spot still, but #1 centre, even with the much maligned Bozak, is not as bad as it once was, I would argue. We have two 2nd line centres, and our guy on the top line (Bozak) is still growing and developing and has very good chemistry with our two "star" players.

That is much better than an on again, off again Antropov, IMHO, who we already knew had peaked.

Our prospect status has taken a "hit" in rankings because a few of our prospects are now NHLers . . . with Gardiner and Frattin taken off the list. But trust me as a longtime Leafer . . . it's night and day between what was, and what is now, even with Kadri being a bust and even if Scrivens never amounts to anything. Reilly alone puts us well ahead of those times.

That was one of two of what I would describe as Burkes very great strengths: building a great prospect pool (player development), and trades (negotiating).

"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug

Beans15

Posted - 01/10/2013 : 22:51:44

quote:Originally posted by Guest9880

quote:Originally posted by Beans152 - When the Leafs hired Brian Burke they had not been in the playoffs since 2004. He had complete autonomy in hockey decisions, executed countless trades, player pick-ups, and draft picks, and 4 years of time. A reasonable look at the teams tells us they no more than marginally better today than they were at the time he was hired and they are certainly no better positioned to be better in the future.

I'm no Burke fan either but hockeynews.com ranks the Leaf prospects within the top 5.

But that Kessel is forever linked to Burke as the mistake that likely did him in.

Hockey News is also located in TO and has been heavily Leaf biased for years. Hockey futures ranks them 20th and hockey prospectus has them ranked 15th.

I still don't think they are any better today than they were when Burke took over.

Daniel Alfredsson is the MVP of the universe. All hail the Ottawa Senators!!!!!

Guest9880

Posted - 01/10/2013 : 19:55:23

quote:Originally posted by Beans152 - When the Leafs hired Brian Burke they had not been in the playoffs since 2004. He had complete autonomy in hockey decisions, executed countless trades, player pick-ups, and draft picks, and 4 years of time. A reasonable look at the teams tells us they no more than marginally better today than they were at the time he was hired and they are certainly no better positioned to be better in the future.

I'm no Burke fan either but hockeynews.com ranks the Leaf prospects within the top 5.

But that Kessel is forever linked to Burke as the mistake that likely did him in.

Beans15

Posted - 01/10/2013 : 14:43:07 Now, I will not ever be a Brian Burke fan. I think he received far too much credit for winning a Cup in Anaheim with a team that Brian Murray built. I don't think he did much of anything in Vancouver other than trading up to get both Sedins.

That said, I think he did SOME very smart moves in Toronto. He added Phaneuf, Lupul, MacArthur, Liles, Van Riemsdyk, Gardiner, and Franson and did that without losing anything too huge. I still like Schenn but other than that, no one else Burke moved to get those guys is worth much of anything to a hockey team.

On the flip side, there were almost an equal number of poor moves. The Kessel deal is brought up ad nasuem but it was a mistake in hindsight. Adding Komisarek was also a poor move and the drafts under Burke have not amounted to anything of value.

I think there are two key points that rationalize the punting of Burke:

1 - Burke clearly defined the needs of the team prior to Free Agency as a #1 goalie and a #1 centre. I think almost everyone agreed with those being the outstanding needed. The Leafs do not have those pieces.

2 - When the Leafs hired Brian Burke they had not been in the playoffs since 2004. He had complete autonomy in hockey decisions, executed countless trades, player pick-ups, and draft picks, and 4 years of time. A reasonable look at the teams tells us they no more than marginally better today than they were at the time he was hired and they are certainly no better positioned to be better in the future.

Reason 1 is enough for most GM's to be fired. If a GM can't obtain the pieces need to win they are useless to the team. Reason 2 is icing on the cake.

Daniel Alfredsson is the MVP of the universe. All hail the Ottawa Senators!!!!!

Donny Fehr and The Count were walking out of the room after announcing they had a CBA to present to the owners and players. As Fuhr and Bettman did their phony pat on each other’s back Fehr says, "Hey Betts, how do we get the media to start talking about something else rather than talking about how we robbed everyone of 1/2 a season of hockey?" Bettman looked over said, "Don't worry Fehrsie, I'll get MLSE to punt Burke. That should get the media storm pushed away from us until we get the 'Free Centre Ice Package' ready to go."

On a more serious note, as others have said, the timing of this is the most surprising aspect. Logically, I think the BOG or the NHL had put a stop to all activity within the NHL during the labour dispute. Any activity from inside the NHL could have been misconstrued by either the media or the players. A key, big name GM gotten canned in the middle of negotiations it would have likely created controversy that the NHL did not want.

For that reason, I do think this decision was made some time in the past but the execution (pun intended) did not occur until after the CBA was basically ratified.

Daniel Alfredsson is the MVP of the universe. All hail the Ottawa Senators!!!!!

The_Gipper

Posted - 01/10/2013 : 06:03:26

quote:Originally posted by Guest6786

after listening to all the "experts" on TV and radio yesterday, i have to believe it was more about Burke and the way he carried himself. his record during his term in Toronto was obviously part of it, but if that was the MAIN reason for firing him, then i think they would have waited until the end of this season.i believe it simply came down to a "clash of personalities" between Burke and the new owners. and it may very well have stemmed from the whole Luongo fiasco. perhaps, from Burke's point of view, MLSE crossed the line by giving opinions about what transactions he should be making. i'm guessing that the only time Burke would get the owners involved in hockey related transactions is when he was seeking their final stamp of approval. i don't think he would ever tolerate an owner trying to tell him how to run the team (eg. make the deal for Luongo). and when that started happening it was the beginning of the end for Burke.

sorry, this was me. forgot to login.

Guest6786

Posted - 01/10/2013 : 06:02:23 after listening to all the "experts" on TV and radio yesterday, i have to believe it was more about Burke and the way he carried himself. his record during his term in Toronto was obviously part of it, but if that was the MAIN reason for firing him, then i think they would have waited until the end of this season.i believe it simply came down to a "clash of personalities" between Burke and the new owners. and it may very well have stemmed from the whole Luongo fiasco. perhaps, from Burke's point of view, MLSE crossed the line by giving opinions about what transactions he should be making. i'm guessing that the only time Burke would get the owners involved in hockey related transactions is when he was seeking their final stamp of approval. i don't think he would ever tolerate an owner trying to tell him how to run the team (eg. make the deal for Luongo). and when that started happening it was the beginning of the end for Burke.

slozo

Posted - 01/10/2013 : 05:27:11 What a difference a couple of press conferences can make for me. The key voices I listened to and learned from were Dave Nonis (new GM and Burke's right hand man) and Tom Anselmi (speaking on behalf of the Toronto ownership group).

What I learned:1) Shocker - Dave Nonis was 100% completely shocked and surprised by the move - not even a hint of it beforehand. I believe him from his reaction, etc too, no doubt about it.

This means that between Burke and Nonis, no preparations were made whatsoever to hand things off, for Nonis to take a larger role in any ongoing negotiations or preparations, etc. It also means, that seconds after Nonis hears Burke is fired, they plop a contract on his lap and ask him to be the GM.

Uh, sure . . . yeah, I can be GM right now . . . as opposed to saying no and letting the entire organisation slide into hell.

2) The official reason from ownership is . . . we wren't happy with Burke's performance and management style (the whole package) and we came to the decision and decided to act on it.

A couple of days before the week of camp before the season starts in a shortened, compressed season, that is.

How much do I believe this, and his refutal of any rumours that this had something to do with a possibly acquisition of a player (talking of Luongo without mentioning his name in the interview with Bob McCowan)? I'm at about 50% honestly . . . and Anselmi strikes me as a pretty straight shooter and not a particularly good liar (he's not a polished lawyer like Bettman with smooth delivery, is what I am saying).

Quite likely in my estimation, it's a combination of the first three reasons - mainly #1, but #2 and #3 put them over the edge to suddenly do the firing now of all times.

"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug

Guest2458

Posted - 01/09/2013 : 13:23:34 I think its easily the Phil Kessel deal. Sent the Leafs back 4 or 5 years.

nuxfan

Posted - 01/09/2013 : 13:01:48

quote:Originally posted by Guest4178

While many criticize Bettman's policies and dealings , to be fair, he's usually following the orders of the BOG's.

I think for this reason alone, Burke is the wrong guy for Bettman's job. The job requires you to follow orders, you are doing the bidding of the owners. Burke does not follow orders particularly well.

Guest4178

Posted - 01/09/2013 : 12:36:59 I don't think it's a 70% likelihood that Burke will become the new NHL commissioner, but I wouldn't rule it out.

Burke would be a huge improvement over Bettman. Despite Burke's crusty exterior, he is bonafide hockey guy, having played college hockey and pro hockey (in the AHL), before going on to be an executive with a number of different NHL franchises.

Burke also carries dual-citizenship (he's married to a CTV news anchor), and while not necessary, this is an asset to the position. Bettman, on the other hand, has always been considered someone who didn't grow up with the game, and an outsider to many Canadian fans.

While many criticize Bettman's policies and dealings , to be fair, he's usually following the orders of the BOG's. But Bettman has never endeared himself to hockey fans. I don't watch (or care) about the other big league sports, but I suspect Bettman's counterparts in the NBA, NFL and MLB are respected more than Bettman. Not a big deal, but it's an embarrassment to the game to see the league commissioner booed every time he goes to an NHL arena (save and except Winnipeg for the time being), or when he hands out the Stanley Cup.

As for the timing, now would be the perfect time. The NHL (and the lockout) needs a scapegoat, and for all those fans who threaten(ed) to boycott hockey, firing Bettman would give them cause (justified or not) to return.

Pasty7

Posted - 01/09/2013 : 11:37:29 I too was thinking something with the Luongo trade either Burke was willing to give up to much in the owners eyes and would not give him the go ahead or the other way around and owners want him to give up what Burke thinks is too much for Luongo,

I had never thought of the Burke being the new bettman thing but for some reason it sounds almost plausible,

if it had been a big argument i don't think he would be kept on in an advisory role,

Another thing is remeber the Gainey out as GM and into and Advisory role for his old assistant Gauthier, remeber how well that worked out? Some of the worst hockey decisions ever made were made under these two. I don't like the idea of fireing a guy and keeping his assistant GM as the new GM. Generally the Assistant is very like minded to his GM so i don't see what change this would bring. Wich again makes slozo's thought about Burke for Bettman sound intersting......

Posted - 01/09/2013 : 11:33:53 That's four things, not two Slozo! :)And while the prospect of Burke getting Bettman's job is interesting, I don't think it's 70% likely. You missed the most likely reason, which is MLSE was not happy with his performance.

nuxfan

Posted - 01/09/2013 : 11:31:14

quote:Originally posted by slozo1) Burke perhaps didn't want a Luongo deal/was against it, and ownership gave him the heave-ho because of it2) Some scandal (totally unconfirmed reports from quite possibly trolls, but it's out there)3) Some huge blow-up argument/other disagreement between Burke and owners4) . . . wait for it . . . Bettman is about to get fired, and his replacement will be Brian Burke.

My thoughts? I give each point a percentage of possibility in my mind:1) 22%2) 6%3) 2%4) 70%

"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug

watching sportsnet now, all the panelists are speculating heavily that it is #1. Burke didn't want Luongo, board does, Nonis taking the job contingent on doing whatever it takes to get Luongo. Nonis is of course the GM that pried Luongo out of FLA in 2006 for VAN...

As a Vancouver fan, I've experienced both Burke and Nonis as GM's (in the same order no less), and I have to say, I always thought Nonis was the better GM. Compared to Burke, very level headed and unemotional about things, straightforward without all the drama. I was never that concerned when VAN fired Burke, but I was not happy when Nonis was let go a few years later.

Also as a VAN fan, I'm pretty happy about this move - if indeed it is #1, then its more likely that Gillis will be able to get fair value for Luongo.

Leafs81

Posted - 01/09/2013 : 11:23:24 I'm really shocked. Timing and I also just didn't see that coming, I never thought Brian Burke was the problem. The team is much better today then when Brian Burke took over.

That being said, I'm glad it's Dave Nonis taking over and lets get this Luongo deal done.

slozo

Posted - 01/09/2013 : 11:20:10 Absolute shocker - almost all because of the timing.

Why NOW?!? Honestly, the timing could not possibly be worse . . . after the new CBA gets ratified, there will be a million things to do, trades to make, players to sign, etc etc etc.

I understand that with Burke retaining an advisory role he will get to help a very capable Nonis during this first two weeks especially, but . . . it is still extremely odd timing.

I have to think that because the timing is SO off for it, it has to be one of two four things:

1) Burke perhaps didn't want a Luongo deal/was against it, and ownership gave him the heave-ho because of it2) Some scandal (totally unconfirmed reports from quite possibly trolls, but it's out there)3) Some huge blow-up argument/other disagreement between Burke and owners4) . . . wait for it . . . Bettman is about to get fired, and his replacement will be Brian Burke.

My thoughts? I give each point a percentage of possibility in my mind:1) 22%2) 6%3) 2%4) 70%

"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug

Alex116

Posted - 01/09/2013 : 10:58:50 Very odd timing indeed. This is the 2nd time Dave Nonis will be taking over a GM position from Burke too as that's what happened here in Vancouver. For me, it makes it more difficult to hate the Leafs as i really like Dave Nonis!

Guest4178

Posted - 01/09/2013 : 10:01:07 Wow – that's surprising news! Not because Burke has done such a great job in Toronto, but the timing of the news. MLSE must have been considering this for months, and waited until the lockout was settled to pull the trigger.

Maybe (and I'm just kidding), Roberto Luongo made this as part of his demands to agree to play for the Leafs! :)

Pasty7

Posted - 01/09/2013 : 10:01:02 I just don't understand why now? why not after free agency when he didn;t address the teams needs ? it seems to me like an odd time to make this change a week before a shortend season begins,